SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2015 Supreme(Del) 1440

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
HIMA KOHLI, J.
Neelam Azad - Plaintiff
Versus
Om Dutt Kardam & Others - Defendants
CS(OS) 1682/2012 and I.A. 10789/2012
Decided on : 16.07.2015

Important Points

Dismissal in default and for non-prosecution due to plaintiff's failure to appear and pursue the suit, following a settlement reached in a connected suit.

Subject

Civil Law - Dismissal in Default

Headnote

Dismissal in Default - Settlement - The court dismissed the suit in default and for non-prosecution after the plaintiff failed to appear and pursue the suit, following a settlement reached in a connected suit at the Delhi High Court Mediation & Conciliation Centre.

Fact of the Case:

The plaintiff failed to appear and pursue the suit, leading to its dismissal in default and for non-prosecution, after a settlement was reached in a connected suit at the Delhi High Court Mediation & Conciliation Centre.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the plaintiff did not wish to pursue the suit any further, leading to its dismissal in default and for non-prosecution.

Issues: Failure of plaintiff to appear and pursue the suit, settlement reached in a connected suit, dismissal in default and for non-prosecution.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the plaintiff's absence and failure to pursue the suit, as well as the settlement reached in a connected suit, leading to the dismissal in default and for non-prosecution.

Final Decision: The suit was dismissed in default and for non-prosecution, along with pending application.

Order

1. The case was passed over on the first call as none was present on behalf of the plaintiff. Same is the position even on the second call.

2. On the last date of hearing, counsel for the defendants No.1 & 2 had entered appearance and stated that the parties had arrived at a settlement in the Delhi High Court Mediation & Conciliation Centre in a suit instituted by his clients against the plaintiff wherein, a prayer was made for cancellation of the sale deed in respect of the suit premises. The court was also informed that the settlement had been duly accepted. As none was present on behalf of the plaintiff on the last date of hearing, counsel for the defendants No.1 & 2 was directed to give a written intimation of the next date of hearing to the counsel for the plaintiff and place on record proof of intimation. Further, counsel for the defendants No.1 & 2 was directed to hand over to the court, a copy of the order passed in the connected suit along with a copy of the settlement arrived at during the mediation.

3. None is present on behalf of the plaintiff today, nor was the plaintiff represented through counsel before the Joint Registrar on 20.3.2015. It is therefore assumed that the plaintiff does not wish to pursue the present suit any further. The suit is dismissed in default and for non-prosecution, along with pending application. The date of 15.9.2015, fixed before the Joint Registrar stands cancelled.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top